BACKGROUND: The global warming debate is again coming
to the forefront on Capitol Hill. Senator John McCain (R-AZ)
has scheduled global warming hearings in the Senate Commerce
Committee May 7; Senator Joseph Lieberman is expected to give
a speech May 7 on global warming; and, most significant, consideration
of the Senate Energy Bill, S. 14, began this week. Numerous amendments
relating to global warming are expected to be proposed, and debate
is expected to be contentious.

Expected amendments include, among others:

An amendment based on McCain-Lieberman's
S. 139, which would force the electricity, transportation, industrial
and commercial sectors to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 2000
levels by 2010, and 1990 levels by 2016 (see Ten
Second Response #1803);

An amendment by Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR)
to establish a "Forest Carbon Program" to give federal
funding to states, forest owners, local governments and others
to restore and conserve forests.

TEN SECOND RESPONSE: All global warming legislation, regardless
of sponsor, tends to be expensive, and most propose policies
that would kill many hundreds of thousands of jobs. Jobs at the
U.S. Senate are not, however, among those imperiled.

THIRTY SECOND RESPONSE: The theory that human activity
is causing the planet to warm significantly is just that, a theory,
and one that, so far, hasn't been coming true. Any serious
discussion about global warming -- whether in Senate debate,
hearing testimony, speeches, prepared remarks or press releases
-- should include an acknowledgement that the best available
scientific models of our atmosphere are not yet sophisticated
enough to accurately predict either future temperatures or humankind's
impact upon climate.

DISCUSSION:
Points to ponder as the global warming debate continues:

"One must dig carefully through
[the National Academy of Sciences report "Climate Change
Science"] to discover that water vapor and cloud droplets
are in fact the dominant cause of greenhouse warming. We are
not told, however, what fraction of the greenhouse effect is
due to water vapor and clouds. Nor are we told that carbon dioxide
is a minor greenhouse gas - one that accounts for less than ten
percent of the greenhouse effect - whose ability to absorb heat
is quite limited. Adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere
only increases greenhouse warming very slowly. Similarly, decreasing
the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere only decreases
greenhouse warming very slowly." -National Policy Analysis
#349: Climate Change Science?: National Academy of Sciences Global
Warming Report Fails to Live Up to Its Billing, by Gerald Marsh

"Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse
gas that occurs naturally in the atmosphere and helps to maintain
the earth at a temperature suitable for life. Carbon dioxide
is essential to the growth of all plants. Without it, plants
could not grow and all animal life would consequently die. In
no way is this gas a pollutant. To call it one is badly misleading.
The principal greenhouse gas is water vapor." National
Policy Analysis #458: Nonsense By Any Other Name: Calling Carbon
Dioxide A Pollutant Doesn't Make It A Pollutant, by Gerald Marsh

"Approximately 5 million different
parameters have to be followed for a computer mock-up of the
climate system to be accurate. All their important interactions
and impacts must be known, but they are not. Furthermore, a full
mock-up, covering all the spatial scales and generating a 40-year
forecast of climate change, would take more than 10 to the power
of 34 years of supercomputing. In other words, an incredibly
long wait and a near-impossible computational task." -
National Policy Analysis #417, Climate Change and California
Assembly Bill 1058: Is it Hype? byDr. Willie Soon

"The vast majority of American scientists
who specialize in climate studies - including such giants as
S. Fred Singer, former head of the U.S. Weather Service's satellite
operations; Frederick Seitz, past president of the National Academy
of Sciences; and the University of Virginia's Patrick Michaels
- believe the [global warming] fear-mongers are wrong. The U.N.
Panel on Climate Change, often cited by environmentalists, bases
its projections on worst-case scenarios from two flawed computer
models, each of which significantly contradicts the other when
it comes to impact of global warming on specific geographical
areas." - National Policy Analysis #446, McCain and Lieberman
Join the Ranks of Ecoactivists With New Legislation on Global
Warming, by Amy Ridenour

"Contrary to the conventional wisdom
and the predictions of computer models, the Earth's climate has
not warmed appreciably in the past two decades, and probably
not since about 1940. The evidence is overwhelming." -Testimony
of Dr. S. Fred Singer, President, The Science & Environmental
Policy Project, before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation on Climate Change, July 18, 2000

"Dr. Craig Idso of the Center for
the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, one of the nation's
leading carbon dioxide research centers, examined records of
atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and air temperature
over the last 250,000 years. There were three dramatic episodes
of global warming that occurred at the end of the last three
ice ages. Interestingly, temperatures started to rise during
those warming periods well before the atmospheric carbon dioxide
started to increase. In fact, the carbon dioxide levels did not
begin to rise until 400 to 1,000 years after the planet began
to warm. Concludes Dr. Idso, 'Clearly, there is no way that these
real-world observations can be construed to even hint at the
possibility that a significant increase in atmospheric carbon
dioxide will necessarily lead to any global warming.'" -
National Policy Analysis #334, Carbon Dioxide is Good for the
Environment by John Carlisle

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

National Policy Analysis #349: Climate
Change Science? National Academy of Sciences Global Warming Report
Fails to Live Up to Its Billing, by Gerald Marsh, available
at http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA349.html